Next week, the Court of Appeal will hear Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s appeal against a High Court decision that the proscription of Palestine Action last summer was unlawful. The case will be hugely consequential. Earlier this month, more than 500 people were arrested at a Palestine Action demonstration. In total, more than 2,700 people have been arrested for expressing support for the group since they were banned in July last year by Mahmood’s predecessor Yvette Cooper. Prosecutions against these individuals were put on hold following the High Court’s judgment in February.

I have previously argued that the High Court’s decision was both unfortunate and unwise. Palestine Action had been involved in a number of activities, including damaging aircraft at RAF Brize Norton using paint and crowbars and attacking defence firms that provide services and supplies to support UK defence enterprises.

The High Court acknowledged that the group was not simply engaged in peaceful protest. Nonetheless, the judges found against the Home Secretary on two grounds.

We should not conflate Palestine Action’s activities with peaceful protest and freedom of speech

We should not conflate Palestine Action’s activities with peaceful protest and freedom of speech

First, they concluded that she had not acted consistently with her published policy on proscription because she had regard to the significant ‘disruptive benefits’ that banning Palestine Action might provide (a factor which was not included in the policy). The judges accepted that this conclusion ‘may appear to rest on a very narrow basis’ given........

© The Spectator